Eric Lindros...HOFer?

[Elite Sim News (ESN)]

Alrighty then, so Eric Lindros has called it quits. No doubt there will be a range of emotions when discussing Big E, but I'm not here for emotions. I have one simple question for everyone here: Do you think Eric Lindros is a Hall of Famer?

Me...absoFREAKINlutely. Here are the numbers:

Career Regular Season totals
711 GP, 367 G, 472 A, 839 PTS, +216 (1.18 PG)

Career Playoff totals
50 GP, 24 G, 33 A, 57 PTS, +10 (1.14 PPG)

Pearson/Hart Awards in 1995

One of the most dominating players I have ever seen (granted I'm only 24 years old, but still). I'm not young enough to have never seen Gretzky, Lemieux, Messier, etc. Simply put, Eric Lindros was a phenomenal hockey player. I don't give a rats behind that he's also a first class eh-hole. That has nothing to do with his play on the ice. That has nothing to do with him being among the very best hockey players in the world for much of the 90s. That has nothing to do with most of you who didn't follow the Canadians knowing who John LeClair is.

Eric Lindros, along with many others (Pavel Bure immediately comes to mind), had his career adversely effected by injuries. That said, there's no denying that during his prime, Eric Lindros was one of the best players the NHL had ever seen. The reason for this thread is simple...I just want to know whether you think Lindros should be in the HHOF or not.

[Anaheim GM]

If durability, unselfishness, and a "team first" attitude meant anything to those who vote on Hall-of-Famers, there would be a snowball's chance in hell that Eric Lindros gets enshrined.

Unfortunately, you look at those numbers and you say, "Wow, over a point of game of production, and vote yes."

At the end of the day, Lindros' days in uniform are numbered because he played a very physical, even dirty style of play while he was in the NHL and the guy COULD NOT take the same type of hits he dished out, plain and simple. I loved the game when a Penguin-uniform-donned Kasparaitis laid out that doppy goon with one hit. Concussion #45 for that oversized pane of glass.

No offense to you, Roger, because I sense you are being a bit of a devil's advocate here, and I certainly wouldn't ever knock anyone on their age. However, Lindros belongs nowhere close to comparison of a Gretzky, Lemieux, Crosby, or the game's other generational talent.

Lindros is a marginal HOFer at best. In my mind, it takes more than a Hart Trophy to get you into the Hall, although, I think my standards are much, much higher than theirs.

Whatever happens with the Hall, I say "good for him". I think his career was effectively one of the most disappointing in recent history, however. If you take into consideration what most people's expectations were of Lindros (considering his successes) and look at those numbers again, he didn't even come close to satisfying what he should have and I doubt many will argue against that.

[formerDevilsGM]

I see Lindros as a borderline player as fas as hall of famer goes, I could see how he could be in but I can also see how could be left out.
But I do not see as the dominant force you are making him out to be.
Sure ballot Hall of famers of the era I know would be Yzerman, Sakic, Modano, Hull, etc and I see Lindros no where near where this group of guys are.
The reasons are very obvious Team Players, Length of career, Name on the Cup among other things.

In the minor's this guy would knock anybody out and he got use to being the big boy on the block. Then he joined the NHL where guys like Stevens and Kasparaitis pretty much knocked him out.

To me he was a good players who has his career cut short. unfurtunantly for him you go into the hall for what you did not for you could have accmplished if you would have been healthy.

I know its not hockey but you can ask the same question for Terrel Davis who played with the Broncos, for 4 years this guy was about as great as Running Back can be +2000 yards in a season + 2 superbowls, NFL MVP, Superbowl MVP.
But can you be a hall of famer in just 4 years of service..
Tough call very tough call.

Maybe if Lindors had a Cup or 2 along the way would for sure get him on.

But if I was votting he is not in.

[nyigm]

Hall of Fame, are u serious? hahaaha...no further comment needed.

[Elite Sim News (ESN)]

Interesting. I gotta say I thought the boys would be split on this one, but d**n.

Am I wrong in saying that Eric Lindros was an elite NHLer during the 90s? Am I wrong in saying that from his first year in Philly in 92-93 through his last year in Philly in 99-00, Eric Lindros was one of the best players in NHL history? Clearly I was watching a different Eric Lindros than what you guys were shown.

We'll look at that period from 92-93 through 99-00. Eric Lindros appeared in only 486 games, while managing to put up 659 points. That, boys and otherwise, comes out to 1.36 PPG. Here's a quick list of guys during this same stretch from 92-93 through 99-00 who Lindros was above:

Joe Sakic @ 1.25 PPG
Adam Oates @ 1.17 PPG
Steve Yzerman @ 1.13 PPG
Ron Francis @ 1.11 PPG
Mike Modano @ 1.09 PPG
Brett Hull @ 1.07 PPG
Doug Gilmour @ 1.04 PPG
Mark Messier @ 1.04 PPG (granted it was the end of his career)

Surprising you Pittsburgh boys hadn't brought up Jagr yet, haha. Just for kicks...Lemieux was at an insane 2.11 PPG. Jagr was at 1.45 PPG.

That is how good Eric Lindros' offensive game was. I can't quantify exactly how much his physical presence enhanced his overall game. Yes it's unfortunate he couldn't skate with his head up...but injuries can't take away an eight year stretch of great play that was Eric Lindros.

If you need more convincing of how good Lindros was...check out John LeClair's numbers before, during, and after the 92-93 through 99-00 seasons.

www.tsn.ca/nhl/teams/players/bio/?id=282&hubname=nhl

Again, please tell me I'm wrong in saying that during the 90s Eric Lindros was a terrific hockey player. I'd like to add that I couldn't care any less than I do right now if Lindros does get the invite from the hall or not. I thought it would be interesting seeing what you guys thought about him.

[FlyersGM]

My vote is no. As Mark stated above, Lindros is the prototypical a**hole. When you look at the HOF you see great talents like Gretzky, Orr and others, but you also see heart and soul guys like Clark Gillies. Unfortunately for Lindros he did not accomplish enough in the time he played (personal goals aside, I am talking team here). Mark makes a point about how Lindros couldn't take the hits, he dished out, which I believe to an extent is true. However, unfortunately for him, the Lindros family seems to have some bad genetics when it comes to the head (guess thats where the a**hole part comes from) and Eric like his brother Brett could never avoid concussions.

[SJSharks]

Oh helllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll, no. If they let Lindros in, they might as well, let everyon else and their dog be in the Hall of Fame.

[ex-BluesGM]

Lindros is a HOFer for sure. I don't like the guy, never did. One of the saddest days or me as a Rangers' fan was seeing him don a Blueshirt. (At least I didn't have to watch him play much.)

But the numbers speak for themselves and he would not be the first player inducted into the HOF based on numbers over a shortened period of time. It happens frequently because of the shelf life of players in the NHL in general.

Now that said, if he's not inducted it will be because of his lack of production if the second half of his career, things like that play into peoples minds a lot more then attitude when talking HOF.

I pretty much agree with all the nay-sayers of the group on Lindros, but I do think he gets in.

THe only issue I have with anything anyone's said is Mark. Don't lump Sidney Crosby in with Gretzky and Lemieux and Messier for his (now) 2+ year old career while you're disdaining Lindros for lack of production over the long haul.

I like Crosby, but the kid could get a concussion tomorrow and never play again.... I certainly hope not, but you never know. I mean if Lindros wasn't made of glass we wouldn't be having this discussion. Hopefully for the league Sid will be able to handle the grind for the next decade and a half at least, but for now he cannot be lumped with the greats of all time, unless the discussion is based purely on pontential.

[WildGM]

He is in for sure. I can’t say I agree due to the fact that Eric is a complete a-hole. But if they used being a prick as criteria weather to vote a player into any pro hall of fame these would have to be called walls of fame. Although hockey players seem to be more down to earth family men you get your occasional prick. But you can not overlook the production on the Ice. Jusy my opinion.

[formerDevilsGM]

I would say he gets in just cause of his trade that helped my Avalanche/Nordiques.

Many consider this trade a key reason that the Colorado Avalanche, which the Nordiques became in 1995, went on to be an NHL powerhouse. They received in the trade Peter Forsberg, Ron Hextall, Chris Simon, Mike Ricci, Kerry Huffman, Steve Duchesne, a 1st round selection (Jocelyn Thibault) in 1993, a 1st round selection (later traded to the Toronto Maple Leafs, later traded to the Washington Capitals - Nolan Baumgartner) in 1994, and $15,000,000 cash. Since the trade, the Avalanche have won eight division titles and two Stanley Cup championships, due in part to the play of Forsberg, and the later addition of Patrick Roy, whom the Avalanche received in a later package deal that included Thibault.

[CalgaryGM]

Considering the types of players that have gotten into the HOF in the history of HOF inductees, then Eric Lindros will be voted in, no doubt about it. If Clark Gillies (0.72 ppg) can get into the HOF so can Lindros.

Personally I don't think he should get in. He made himself out to be bigger than the game when he refused to play for the team that drafted him. No one has done that before him or since then. I had the displeasure of meeting him once, he was an eh-hole and he had no right to be, I'll leave it at that.

For what he did on the ice he will get in the HOF. He won't get in the first time around but he will get in the 2nd time.

[Anaheim GM]

darkoverlord said:

THe only issue I have with anything anyone's said is Mark. Don't lump Sidney Crosby in with Gretzky and Lemieux and Messier for his (now) 2+ year old career while you're disdaining Lindros for lack of production over the long haul.

I like Crosby, but the kid could get a concussion tomorrow and never play again.... I certainly hope not, but you never know. I mean if Lindros wasn't made of glass we wouldn't be having this discussion. Hopefully for the league Sid will be able to handle the grind for the next decade and a half at least, but for now he cannot be lumped with the greats of all time, unless the discussion is based purely on pontential.

So far, Crosby has beaten Gretzy's records (remembering that back when Wayne was playing hockey that defensemen were super-quick forwards who were simply able to cover more ground and the majority of goaltenders couldn't stop a beach ball). Crosby has set these records in a time when defensemen and goalies are the teams TOP athletes, not the worst. I think that speaks very well for the dominating, generational, future Hall of Fame career, that lies ahead for Crosby.

In addition, Crosby's ability to come in and become an instant leader in the locker room while handling the media, the city, and the fans with a level of professionalism that puts international diplomats to shame.

With the records he has beaten in his 2+ season career (youngest player to score 100 points, youngest player to win the Hart Trophy, etc.) he absolutely deserves to be included with the few as generational talent.

Lindros may have been a dominating player at times (the Legion of Doom line was incredibly tough to play against), but there is absolutely no argument that can be made to say that he was a "generational talent". Are you going to argue that Sidney Crosby isn't? That is, simply put, the point I was making.

If Sidney Crosby gets killed in a car accident tomorrow (Dear God watch over him), he makes the Hall of Fame on the first ballet, in my opinion. Will Lindros? We think not, so far.

[Anaheim GM]

Can you tell I REALLY don't like Eric Lindros?

My problems lie with Lindros on several levels.

#1) Personally, I don't care for any player who attempts to dictate where they play by refusing to play for a team. Eli Manning in the NFL, for example: I feel exactly the same way about him and although I really like his brother Peyton and have a lot of respect for his father Archie. However, Eli, on the other hand is the black sheep of the family with his idiotic draft day antics and greed.

#2) He played for the Philadelphia Flyers and I hate them more than I hate the Toronto Maple Leafs (I'm sure the feeling is mutual), which is pretty hard to fathom. The Broad Street Bullies always leave a bad taste in my mouth, although this year the team is fairly unrecognizable with all of the new faces, it may take a game or two before the hatred comes out.

#3) He played a physical style of game that his genetics/body/etc. could not handle. I question his intelligence as to why he continued to play the way he did.

#4) He stirred up so much crap in Philadelphia (distraction), and although I have no reason to really like Clarke (GM), he is still the boss. My suggestion to Eric is to strive to become a GM so some punk kid can dictate to you how you to do your job on a daily basis. Sound good? Distraction players are NOT team players and personally, a player should not get in for his statistics alone, he needs to get in with his team approach to the game, attitude in the locker room, and how well a player represents the NHL.

#5) I don't like players who believe them to be bigger than the traditions, rules, ethics, and heritage of any sport. Eric and his family believed in his mind that he was.

Yes, Eric was a very good player when he played and I will go as far as to say he was a dominating force when he hit the ice. However, his locker room and off-ice antics nearly overshadowed all of this. After all, most of us consider ourselves to be hard core fans and so far, most of us would like to see the HOF take a pass on him. Personally, I think that speaks very well about the GMs of the NsHL.

[tampagm]

Eric Lindros should NOT make it to the hall... but I think he will anyway ... don't forget the weirdness of Hall voters ... Federko in ... Glen Anderson not ... (and I hate the Oilers) ... no Larmer? roll the dice Eric, you've got a great shot! And how appropriate that on the day he retired he also donated 5 million to a new medical clinic! HAHAHAHA!!!

[Elite Sim News (ESN)]

So Mark, what do you think of the likes of John Elway, Bo Jackson and J.D. Drew? Although in this case I will agree with you. I hate it when kids tell teams they won't play for them if they draft them.

This is why I started this thread. I wanted to see if the boys could separate emotion from the issue. I can't see how anyone who ever watched Lindros play could honestly say that he wasn't among the greatest players to lace em up.

Now I get to really piss you off Mark . I will say that Eric Lindros WAS a generational talent. During the years discussed earlier, Lindros was top 5 in PPG in NHL history. His size and skill combination, and his willingness to play the physical game he did, are a very rare mix. If you look for players like Lindros in the draft every year, you are going to be waiting for a while.

As for the Crosby being put in the hall if the unthinkable were to happen tomorrow...wow. I don't care how good a player is, 20 year old kids aren't getting put in the hall of anything sports related. Is Crosby a generational talent? I don't think you find anyone around who thinks he isn't. Hall of Fame at the age of 20? You know better than that.

Good conversation though. Let's get a few more opinions in here eh!